Will County Finance Committee met Sept. 4.
Here is the minutes provided by the Committee:
I. CALL TO ORDER / ROLL CALL
Chair Mike Fricilone called the meeting to order at 10:03 AM
| Attendee Name | Title | Status |
| Mike Fricilone | Chair | Present |
| Ray Tuminello | Vice-Chair | Present |
| Steve Balich | Member | Present |
| Darren Bennefield | Member | Present |
| Gloria Dollinger | Member | Present |
| Kenneth E. Harris | Member | Late |
| Cory Singer | Member | Absent |
| Lauren Staley-Ferry | Member | Present |
| Jacqueline Traynere | Member | Present |
Present from State's Attorney's Office: M. Tatroe.
II. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Mr. Bennefield led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
1. WC Finance Committee - Regular Meeting - Aug 7, 2018 10:00 AM
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member
SECONDER: Steve Balich, Member
AYES: Fricilone, Tuminello, Balich, Bennefield, Dollinger, Staley-Ferry, Traynere
ABSENT: Harris, Singer
IV. OLD BUSINESS
V. NEW BUSINESS
1. Process & Procedures of BMO Procurement Card (Duffy Blackburn)
Mr. Moustis stated I asked Ms. Pleasant to talk about our P-card procedures. Some counties don’t have procedures and I wanted to make sure Will County does. This is a serious subject on how the P-cards, basically credit cards are used and audited.
Mr. Fricilone stated no Will County Board members have P-cards. Other counties allowed Board members to have P-cards and have run into issues.
Mr. Moustis stated there is a card in the County Board Office and Mrs. Adams and Mrs. Johannsen are authorized to use it.
Ms. Pleasant stated the P-card is a credit card, issued to an individual with fraud protection. If it were a corporate card issued to Will County, we would not have unlimited fraud protection from BMO. In our office, Ms. Gloria Martinez looks at every P-card transaction. A review of the attached packet was given.
Mr. Fricilone asked why do some departments have double digit cards issued? The Health Department has 16 and 9-1-1 has 11.
Ms. Pleasant replied 9-1-1 has a card for every employee. They use it for any type of purchase versus going through the PO or direct payment process. The number of cards does not alarm me, what is alarming is whether they follow the County procedures. They do or they would not have a card. The number of cards is based on what a department head requests. I look at all of those requests and if they are not a problem employee or problem department a card is issued.
Mr. Tuminello asked out of the $7.5 million put on the P-card, over $4 million came from the 9-1-1. What are they buying?
Ms. Pleasant replied it is their monthly AT&T phone bills for all the 9-1-1 lines. Their Motorola contract it is put on the P-card, to kick up the spend to get more money back.
Mr. Tuminello asked is that really the best way to pay the telephone lines? Typically, you write a check.
Ms. Pleasant responded it doesn’t make a difference. It is still coded to the same code and it gets flagged as a fixed asset. The only difference is the method of payment; writing a check, doing an ACH or putting it on the card.
Mr. Tuminello continued is there chance of loss or risk if someone puts their own phone bill on the card?
Ms. Pleasant answered that is not happening because it is the same phone bills, the same 9-1-1 lines over and over and Ms. Martinez looks at the numbers. A review of page three of the handout was given.
Mr. Moustis stated 9-1-1 recently was put under the Executive’s branch of government, prior to that, it was under the Sheriff. Mr. Palmer what is the procedure internally for issuing?
Mr. Palmer stated the LCC which is the dispatchers are under us. The ETSB, the 9- 1-1 Board has the credit card, is a separate board. It is true they are charging the phones and other things. We have a new Executive Director, Mr. Anthony Marzano, replacing Mr. Steve Figved. Our Board has been reviewing all the policies and procedures, so some of that may change. P-cards are quicker and more cost effective than cutting checks. It is not like these are unexpected expenses, so getting checks or ACH is probably just as effective. The benefit is we get money back. They have had a problem with accounting for all of that with our current finance system, when you have that many people with credit cards it is like having that many people with a checkbook.
Mr. Moustis stated this should say ETSB; it is not 9-1-1.
Ms. Pleasant stated it says 9-1-1 because that is the way it has been coded.
Mr. Palmer stated the ETSB Office is a separate entity governed by the ETSB Board. The LCC, Laraway Communications Center is under the Executive. People tend to use these interchangeably, but they are really two separate entities.
Ms. Pleasant pointed out the LCC is further down on the list and they have one card.
Mr. Fricilone asked how much of the $4 million is telephone?
Mr. Shay stated about half is for telephone. The other half is for refreshing equipment for new installations at the LCC. The ETSB had all the new equipment that went into the new facility as well as replacement equipment for WESCOM. They have had a pretty substantial spend this year. There was a delay in the state sending ETSB money, so some of that backed up. ICT and 9-1-1 have substantial phone bills and we were encouraged years ago to put those on the P-cards to get incentive money back, it can be changed.
Mr. Fricilone stated I don’t have an issue using something we get an incentive on, as long as the oversight is the same or better.
Ms. Pleasant stated it is the same; page three of the handout explains the process, from the beginning of the card issuance, the charge process, which works like a credit card, the coding, audit and upload to GL process. The important thing is the fraud is shared with BMO, they have 100% fraud protection. If there is fraud, they expect the County to fire the individual making the erroneous purchases. We have not had any of those things happen. We have had a few cases where people pulled out the wrong card, and made some personal charges, then immediately reimbursed the County. They write a check to the Treasurer’s Office, we get a copy of the check and it goes through the same GL code they used in the first place, since it has to get coded. Every transaction shows up, if you charge it; it gets charged to your GL, and shows up in the Auditor’s checkbook online.
Mrs. Traynere asked are they coming to us and saying they accidentally charged or are we going to them and saying we caught you?
Ms. Pleasant replied 99.9% of the time they are coming to us. The other point is people overspend or change something, then Ms. Martinez will go after them for the amount,
Mr. Tuminello asked is there a handbook or guidelines on charges?
Ms. Pleasant responded everyone comes through me to get the card hand delivered to them. They are told what they can and cannot charge, what happens if they charge something erroneously, they pay it back; if they don’t pay it back we hold it from their check. If it continues to happen they get fired. The subsequent page in the packet is the agreement that says not only will they be fired, they will be sued and will have to pay for all the legal costs. We have not had any of those issues. We look at every single invoice that comes through on BMO, we look at the coding, the dollar amounts, the invoice, we look at exactly what it is. The Jury Room got a TV that was questioned because it said big screen TV. There is not a lot we can do if you are telling me, Mr. Moustis is buying a big screen TV for this room. Do I think it is a good charge as a taxpayer? I don’t. Does it matter? No, because Mr. Moustis is a department head and he can sign off on it. We are limited to what we can do without getting into a legal situation.
Mr. Fricilone asked why would someone use credit versus debit? You have debit total and credit total on your handout.
Ms. Pleasant answered those are things they have charged back, such as fraud. We have had lots of airline fraud, with Air Jordan tickets purchased on people’s cards. They catch it, they call me and ask is this a good charge or they call the person. We say, no and they block the card, issue a new card and give us the credit. This is why it is made in the person’s name, because they are tracking and covering themselves. If I charge Air Jordan tickets, and say I am not but I am, you will have to fire me or you will have to pay them back.
Mr. Tuminello stated the reimbursement portion an employee has to reimburse it is purely accidental. It is not a standard practice they are allowed to use the card and reimburse the county?
Ms. Pleasant responded we had a previous employee doing that to cover between pay periods to buy stuff and I can pull the card immediately. You get two chances and then you are done.
Mr. Tuminello stated that is what I wanted to hear. I learned the lesson on the Village Board with an individual that was able to charge and reimburse.
Ms. Pleasant stated we don’t do that. We don’t have a lot of reimbursements unless something is wrong. In the Lake County situation, from what I heard on the news, they do not have an Auditor and oversight is handled by the Treasurer’s Office. Their County Board, admitted they do not have a good audit system for tracking expenditures. We do have a good audit system for tracking expenditures; every single expenditure gets looked at.
Mr. Fricilone stated all Lake County Board members had cards and I believe DuPage County is the same. Will County Board Members do not have cards and we won’t
Ms. Pleasant stated DuPage County does have an Auditor.
Mrs. Dollinger asked the charges are from January through August; are these usual for the year?
Ms. Pleasant replied yes it is usual. In our office, Mr. Blackburn, our purchasing person and I have cards. If I purchase something, I code it on my card, I can sign off on everybody’s, however, somebody else has to sign on mine, it will not go through with one signature. That is how it works for everybody. If Mrs. Adams orders something and Mrs. Johannsen is not here to signoff it gets sent back and someone else has to sign off on those purchases, you cannot sign off on your own purchases.
Mr. Bennefield asked what is the monthly payments for our phone service at 9-1-1 combined? I see about $500,000 per month for payments on the procurement card.
Mr. Fricilone stated approximately 50%.
Ms. Martinez stated it might be a little less, because they sometimes have other charges. If the phone bill is 150 pages, we review all 150 pages. They are consistent. When they transferred to the new system they put their new equipment charges on there.
Mr. Shay stated this is a big period of transition. We had six call centers and are going to three. There are installation costs associated with the new centers. Nothing this year will be an accurate monthly reflection with so many charges for installation, conduit and the County is adding expenses for the run to the Animal Control and Radio facility. I can reach out to 9-1-1 and get that information.
Mr. Fricilone asked after the installation costs from consolidation, should that reduce our average bills?
Mr. Shay responded yes, it doesn’t matter the size of your call center, you have certain statutory minimums to meet for connectivity speed, quantity, trunk lines, fiber and other things. Consolidation should save money.
Ms. Pleasant stated the actual phone bills are approximately $120,000 per month. Ms. Martinez looks at all the details of what is being charged each month.
Mr. Harris stated we have a labor contract, which outlines steps to be followed when you discipline an employee, not just the procurement card but for using County assets for personal use. Is there a MOU, if the bank expects us to fire a person that we follow for bargaining unit employees?
Mrs. Tatroe stated most of the people with P-cards are not union represented, most are management. Even if they are a union employee with progressive discipline, stealing or fraudulently using the credit card would be an exception to progressive discipline, if it is serious, you could just terminate them.
Mr. Moustis asked does it pertain to the ETSB Board, we are calling 9-1-1, they get and pay the telephone bills for the dispatch centers? How does that work? The ETSB Board provides support and equipment; so what telephone bills are they paying?
Ms. Pleasant stated the department listed on the BMO report 9-1-1, is based on hierarchy. The 9-1-1 Department can code to other departments, with their signoff. So they could be coding to the LCC code and it is falling under 9-1-1 because of this hierarchy.
Mr. Shay stated the monthly service charges for trunk lines for 9-1-1 service are covered by the ETSB and have monthly fees, the actual 9-1-1 service itself is permitted under the ETSB Act.
Mr. Moustis clarified they would pay for all the lines; this is basically a line charge.
Mr. Shay continued the call volume will not change based on the number of call centers. The number of trunk lines and support lines do change and the support costs for the technology declines with consolidation substantially. The ETSB picks up those costs.
Mr. Moustis stated their trunk lines connect to the equipment.
Mr. Shay added those trunk lines go to regional call centers, which connect to us based on geography based on addressing. So all those calls from many of our addresses are paid for by the ETSB.
Mr. Moustis stated now that we have a centralized or consolidated dispatch center do the trunk lines change? Are there less trunk lines?
Mr. Shay responded yes.
Mr. Moustis continued so that should go down substantially.
Mr. Shay stated it will go down; I don’t know how much, because we still have the same call volume. When you took Lincoln-Way, EASCOM, Laraway and Romeoville and combined those into one you still have a minimum amount per unit.
Mr. Moustis stated I am not sure that changes the trunk line itself that much, it is one more benefit of consolidation.
Mr. Palmer stated we could bring in the new ETSB Executive Director sometime to give an overview. There are a lot of moving parts, with budget stuff and he is very good. There are a lot of reviews of the policies and procedures that may be better.
Mr. Fricilone asked can you see if a fee was charged to use the card?
Ms. Pleasant replied yes, it would be coded separately. We discourage people from paying that fee, don’t use the P-card and go through PO. The P-card benefits the merchant because they get their money in 48 hours. If you don’t want it in 48 hour, it is on the invoice. We code it differently and we can pull a fee line item and see how much we pay in fees.
Mr. Tuminello stated most vendors should eliminate the fee, because they have 30 days additional time to use the money.
Ms. Pleasant stated for years the Sheriff has tried to pay for food at the ADF on the P-Card, but they get a better rate by PO. It would be a big amount added to the card, but they were not giving a discount. We will not pay a fee so they get their money in 48 hours. A review of the handout continued.
Mr. Moustis asked is this a policy of the Auditors Office or a County Policy? The reason I am asking is when there is a change in elected officials in the Auditor’s Office, things change. We should have a County policy automatically kick in where the Auditor is directed to do this policy. The Auditor’s Office is not a constitutional office, but we should be able to set certain policies that the Auditor’s Office will follow.
Mrs. Tatroe stated it would be similar to your travel policy, which everyone adopts because the IRS regulations benefit the County. I would think you could deny the use of the BMO card to anyone who did not agree to certain policies.
Mr. Moustis stated I don’t think a County policy has been established. Mrs. Tatroe replied not to my knowledge.
Mr. Moustis asked Mrs. Tatroe to help with setting one along with the Auditor’s Office.
Ms. Pleasant stated an agreement went through County Board in 2002.
Mr. Moustis stated the agreement went through, but I am specifically talking about the auditing procedure.
Mrs. Tatroe indicated she would look at it.
Mr. Moustis stated I want to make sure we have oversight procedures in place everyone has to follow. The Auditor will always have a person auditing the P- cards. I want to tighten it up if we can.
Mr. Moustis asked Ms. Pleasant and Mrs. Tatroe to bring something back next month.
Ms. Pleasant stated a problem we are having in P-card auditing is the tipping 18% versus 15%. The GAC policy we follow says 15%, our previous policy was 15%. Ms. Martinez is getting into arguments with people over a very minimal 3%.
Discussion took place on an appropriate tipping amount and the Committee agreed 18% was appropriate.
Mr. Moustis asked Mrs. Tatroe do we need to make an adjustment to our Travel Policy?
Mrs. Tatroe answered yes, we have to amend the policy. Ms. Pleasant asked could we have a one page amendment?
Active ProCards Handout
(Handout)
2. Discussion of the Implications of HB4594
(Julie McCabe-Sterr)
Ms. McCabe-Sterr gave a review of HB4594 and the attached handout. We brought in more money before municipalities began administrative adjudication in 2015. Drug Count has never received money from the County. In 2004 we had 40 people in Drug Court and used JAG money. Our salaries were covered by the State’s Attorney’s Office. Grants have covered the increases in what Drug Court does. We have 245 participants across the four courts. I will begin the third year of a $100,000 federal drug court grant and I did receive the ARI grant for $450,944 for next year and that will be used to cover four staff members. When this bill takes effect July 1, 2019 the money we received on a monthly basis goes away. Drug Court will have to look to the County Board to get money from the new money the County gets. The Clerk’s Office has been looking more globally.
Mr. Squires state this was just signed, we don’t have details today, but we will come back and let the Board know the effect of this bill. We are talking with other counties. I think this will negatively impact the County. They took away various funding sources and dumped it into the general fund and more money goes to the municipalities and the Sheriff’s Office for issuing tickets. They were issuing tickets and received only a small portion back and it does not cover all their costs. I hope that will increase the issuance of citations, every year we seem to be going down.
Mr. Moustis stated your grants go directly to your programs. We are talking about the money that is part of the fine money that goes through the Courts. In the past it went directly to your program and now it is coming as a lump sum to the general fund; as will all the other fines. It will be up to the County Board and the Executive’s Office through the budgeting process to determine where the money goes. Will we collect less? It is always based on volume of cases and Judges and how they apply the fines.
Mr. Fricilone asked are the fees less in the bill?
Mr. Squires replied the proportion and how the money is divided up has changed.
Mr. Holland added this bill allows defendants to request fine waivers for the first time. That could have a large impact on the amount of money collected.
Mr. Moustis indicated that was appropriate in cases where people are unable to pay the fines and Judges should have the flexibility.
Mr. Fricilone stated in the past you could charge up to a certain amount and now it is so every County gets the same amount.
Mr. Holland stated the reason for this is a study was done on the disparity of fees from different counties. This law is attempting to make it uniform across the State of Illinois.
Mr. Fricilone stated that is a negative for us because the fees are less than we would have charged.
Mr. Holland stated between now and July and the bill could change. This bill breaks things down into 13 categories and it is a complicated piece of legislation.
Mr. Moustis stated not everything is equal because other Counties do not have as robust Specialty Courts as Will County. The services can be different County to County; are they accounting for that?
Mr. Holland replied that is why the money is going into the general fund to be distributed. The County can determine their priorities.
Mr. Moustis stated if everything is the same across the State some counties could get the money but not provide the services. We need to keep this item on the Legislative & Policy Agenda. Have we talked with our lobbyist?
Ms. Freitag replied we started talking with them last year.
Mr. Fricilone stated Ms. McCabe-Sterr you are going to get money, I don’t know if you are going to get what you ask for. If the overall number is down, then everybody’s overall numbers are down. It comes down to how the numbers play out and we will not be able to determine that until we see it. You will not be excluded because it is not in the legislation.
Mr. Moustis stated if the pie gets smaller, then slices gets smaller.
Ms. McCabe-Sterr stated I wanted to make sure you were aware of the impact this will have to the County.
Mr. Holland stated CASA is in the same situation.
Mr. Moustis stated I have heard the State is going to cut in the judicial area 20%, 30% or 40%; there is no way the County can make up the money. We don’t have it either.
Mr. Fricilone stated the plan seems to be take it away from us and make us the bad guys for not providing the services. If we don’t have the money we can’t do it either.
Ms. McCabe-Sterr stated I would just ask that you look at who gets what money and prioritize. Especially with the Problem Solving Courts, I don’t want to be short sighted and not provide the services, because you will spend more money at the ADF.
Mr. Bennefield asked is the $300 for a DUI less than what we currently get?
Mr. Squires answered we are taking a close look at it. Generally, what comes out are all the costs and fees first then what is left is the fine money that goes to the entity issuing the citation. Some of the fees were specifically for Drug Court. Now they have lumped them together. I believe the overall amount is decreasing.
HB4594 Handout
(Handout)
3. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2018 for the Year 2019 to Pay Debt Service on $71,430,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Transportation Improvement Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2010, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
Ms. Hennessy stated these Resolutions set aside the cash needed to pay next years’ debt service. We do this annually so it is not added to the levy when it is set in October.
Mr. Moustis stated when our bonds are issued we use other revenue sources outside of real estate taxes to pay for them. When you issue them they are backed with real estate taxes. It is guaranteed. Since we don’t use real estate taxes to pay for the bonds, it has to be abated or it is automatically put to the levy.
Ms. Hennessy stated the guarantee is what makes our bonds attractive. Mr. Moustis pointed out Moody’s had a very nice article on Will County.
RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member
SECONDER: Steve Balich, Member
AYES: Fricilone, Tuminello, Balich, Bennefield, Dollinger, Harris, Staley-Ferry,
Traynere
ABSENT: Singer
4. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2018 for the Year 2019 to Pay Debt Service on $13,930,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Refunding Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2012, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Ray Tuminello, Vice-Chair
SECONDER: Darren Bennefield, Member
AYES: Fricilone, Tuminello, Balich, Bennefield, Dollinger, Harris, Staley-Ferry,
Traynere
ABSENT: Singer
5. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2018 for the Year 2019 to Pay Debt Service on $5,480,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Refunding Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2014, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member
SECONDER: Darren Bennefield, Member
AYES: Fricilone, Tuminello, Balich, Bennefield, Dollinger, Harris, Staley-Ferry, Traynere
ABSENT: Singer
6. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2018 for the Year 2019 to Pay Debt Service on $16,565,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Refunding Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2015A, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Jacqueline Traynere, Member
SECONDER: Steve Balich, Member
AYES: Fricilone, Tuminello, Balich, Bennefield, Dollinger, Harris, Staley-Ferry, Traynere
ABSENT: Singer
7. Abating the Taxes Heretofore Levied in Tax Levy Year 2018 for the Year 2019 to Pay Debt Service on $173,975,000 Outstanding Principal Amount of General Obligation Bonds (Alternate Revenue Source), Series 2016, of The County of Will, Illinois.
(Karen Hennessy)
Mrs. Traynere asked are any of these going to end next year?
Ms. Hennessy replied numbers 4, 5 and 6 are refunding from the ADF, they will drop off first around 2022 or 2024.
Mr. Moustis stated when we did our last bond structuring we accounted for that.
RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Ray Tuminello, Vice-Chair
SECONDER: Steve Balich, Member
AYES: Fricilone, Tuminello, Balich, Bennefield, Dollinger, Harris, Staley-Ferry, Traynere
ABSENT: Singer
8. Transferring Appropriations within Various County Budgets
(ReShawn Howard)
Ms. Howard stated normally I bring this at this yearend. I am doing it earlier to move money around to the various accounts. Several of these are capital asset projects we are moving within the fund. You will continue to see this mid-year clean up around September and then the year-end cleanup next year.
Mr. Moustis asked do we know where the shortfalls are, including the judicial branch?
Ms. Howard replied they have not told me of any shortfalls at this time.
Mr. Moustis stated Mr. Holland talked to me about shortfalls. For anyone who gave out raises, including the Judicial branch, that were not within the parameters and not funded, that is self-imposed shortfalls. Just because you spent money, does not mean you automatically get the shortfall taken care of. That is the problem we have, departments overspend and tell us we have to cover it. When you look at the shortfalls, was it because we missed the appropriation or because a department ignored the budget and overspent? We cannot keep allowing people to overspend. The Executive branch and County Board stay within their budget.
Mrs. Traynere asked does this include shortfalls from raises within contracts we approved, but did not fund?
Mr. Moustis answered just because we settle a contract, we have made it clear it does not mean you will get additional appropriations. We have made it clear to the unions the result of the increases will be a reduction in the workforce. They have said okay. Our revenue streams are not growing enough to accommodate the spending. If spending and revenue continue on the same trend, we go in the red in three years. Ms. Howard did a presentation, I asked her to take the maximum amount of levy allowed under the tax cap.
Mrs. Traynere stated for several years we did not take the CPI or new property.
Mr. Moustis stated the biggest crisis in Will County is people are to the point they cannot pay their real estate tax bills. People are leaving their homes because of the tax structure. I am concerned about the taxpayers and I am here to represent the people. There was a time the County was in financial crisis and everything across the board was cut 10%; every line item. All I heard was we will never be able to do this; the County will collapse and it didn’t. It was made stronger and we got into a more stable financial setting. We were also doing tax anticipation warrants. It took us 14 years to get out of that cycle. We cannot go back.
Ms. Traynere stated over the last 40 years as taxes have gone up, the value of your home has gone up as well.
Mr. Moustis stated we could have Proposition 13, like California, your assessment is set at what you bought the house for and add 1.5% per year.
Mr. Fricilone stated the state is taking more money from us and we cannot make that up.
Mrs. Traynere stated eliminating employees is not the only way. When you eliminate services, you create issues in other areas.
RESULT: MOVED FORWARD [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Ray Tuminello, Vice-Chair
SECONDER: Steve Balich, Member
AYES: Fricilone, Tuminello, Balich, Bennefield, Dollinger, Harris, Staley-Ferry,
Traynere
ABSENT: Singer
9. Assignment of Tax Sale Certificates
(Julie Shetina)
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
TO: Will County Board
MOVER: Ray Tuminello, Vice-Chair
SECONDER: Darren Bennefield, Member
AYES: Fricilone, Tuminello, Balich, Bennefield, Dollinger, Harris, Staley-Ferry,
Traynere
ABSENT: Singer
VI. OTHER NEW BUSINESS
VII. PUBLIC COMMENT
VIII. CHAIRMAN'S REPORT / ANNOUNCEMENTS
IX. EXECUTIVE SESSION
X. ADJOURNMENT
1. Motion to Adjourn at 11:06 AM
RESULT: APPROVED [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Steve Balich, Member
SECONDER: Ray Tuminello, Vice-Chair
AYES: Fricilone, Tuminello, Balich, Bennefield, Dollinger, Harris, Staley-Ferry, Traynere
ABSENT: Singer
https://willcountyil.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=15&ID=3070&Inline=True
Alerts Sign-up